 I want to remind members of the Covid-related measures that are in place and that face coverings should be worn when moving around the chamber and across the Holyrood campus. The first item of business is portfolio questions, and the first portfolio questions is on health and social care. I would ask if a member wishes to request a supplementary question. They should press the request to speak button or indicate so in the chat function by entering the letter R during the relevant question. In order to get as many people in, I would ask for succinct questions and answers to match if possible. I call question number one, Claire Baker. To ask the Scottish Government how it is supporting NHS boards to mitigate the impact of Covid-19 on service provision over the winter. As is being widely reported, our health and care system is under extreme pressure, which has been exacerbated by the onset of the pandemic. Of course, we are still firmly in the midst of that pandemic. Those unprecedented challenges are resulting in staffing shortages, high demand, both in and out of hours, and the level of delayed discharge. The recent increase in Covid cases, which thankfully is now on a downward trajectory. We also expect that this winter will be the most challenging moment of our face. To mitigate that, we are working closely with partners to ensure that measures are put in place to improve flow and increase capacity across the system, as well as promoting alternative pathways to ensure that patients receive the care that they require. This year, we have already provided an excess of £1 billion to meet Covid pressures in health and social care, including £80 million to address treatment backlogs, additional investment, as the chamber knows, to support the Scottish Ambulance Service and £8 million for staff wellbeing. I will update Parliament shortly on significant further funding that will be provided to support our NHS and social care systems. Earlier this month, all NHS Fife postponed all non-urgent surgery and some outpatient appointment, saying that it was facing pressures unlike anything experienced during its response during the pandemic. Hospitals have already seen more people turn up for both Covid and non-Covid-related conditions than they would at the height of winter, and it is still only September. When will the winter preparedness plan be published and what assurances can the cabinet secretary give to NHS staff and patients that the situation is not going to deteriorate further in Fife? I thank Clare Baker for her question. I can also give her an assurance that I meet with NHS boards right up and down the country regularly, and my officials speak to them as well on a very regular basis. We are very aware of the pressures that NHS Fife is under but also NHS boards right across the country. We are not sitting on our hands. We have already invested. We are investing not just on those Covid pressures but on significant investment that I announced over the course of the summer for non-Covid pressures. As I have already said in my answer to her first question, I will lay out shortly to Parliament some additional funding announcements. We are not spending time creating plans for the sake of creating plans. What we are doing is investing in services right across the entire NHS system. I hope to give more details of some of that later this week, particularly focused on a whole systems approach. That social care side, which we know can help us in delayed discharge. In terms of the very last question that she asks, can I promise her that it will get better? I think that that will be the most challenging winter that the NHS has ever faced. What we will do and have been doing is taking action to do our best to mitigate some of those significant pressures. In January, Professor Griffin from the Royal College of Surgeons Edinburgh called for roads and pavements to be gritted properly, as icy conditions would lead to accidents that the NHS did not have the capacity to deal with. While that was in the context of reducing admissions to hospitals to prevent Covid infections, the same case can now be made to reduce emergency admissions given the current pressures that we are facing. Scotland's NHS is in crisis and today the state of emergency in the NHS was extended until March 22 by the cabinet secretary. Can the cabinet secretary guarantee that all council areas across Scotland will have resources provided to them to ensure that roads and pavements are properly gritted this winter to prevent placing further strain on our NHS? That is a very good question by Ms Webber. To give her an assurance, I am working cross government cross portfolio with my colleagues in resilience around that variation. It is absolutely vital, as Ms Webber rightly points out, that when it comes to the season of slips, trips and falls, that our local authorities are properly resourced to ensure that roads are gritted. That was a discussion that I just had with the chief medical officer this morning, and he gave me an absolute assurance about the conversations that he is having with local partners. To ask the Scottish Government how many systemic reaction specialists there are who can support people who have had an allergic reaction in their first Covid-19 vaccine. It is old information on how many systemic reaction specialists are available centrally, but that information would be available at NHS board level. Allergy to food and medicine is not uncommon, and those types of conditions are treated by a variety of clinicians, both in primary and secondary care. NHS health boards lead on the local delivery of the vaccination programme, and they are well placed to support those who have concerns around allergic reactions and those who have experienced allergic reactions. It is important that people discuss any allergies and disclose any previous serious allergic reactions and any anaphylaxis to the vaccinator. The vaccinators are trained to deal with allergic reactions and treat them immediately. If a person has concerns about receiving their first Covid-19 vaccine due to any potential allergy, they should speak to their GP or clinician for advice. My constituent Craig contacted me after experiencing a severe systemic allergic reaction to his first vaccine. He was referred to a specialist, however, and was advised that he was going to be put on an 18-month waiting list. That is not an isolated case, and it is causing concern for those who are eager to see a specialist, especially as Covid-19 vaccine passports come into force this Friday. I have checked the Scottish Government website this afternoon, and guidance is still not clear for those who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons. How will the Scottish Government tackle that backlog? How can he reassure my constituent that he will not be exploited from any venues, such as a nightclub or football stadium, as he cannot produce a vaccine passport? I thank Megan Gallacher for raising the issue around her constituent. I would be more than happy if Megan Gallacher wished to write to me about the specifics of her constituent, Craig. Of course, we would be happy to look into those incidents. I have spoken, as you would imagine, extensively to clinicians about the issue of allergic reactions in relation to the Covid vaccine. There have been cases where somebody has had an adverse reaction when given their first dose, but they were able to successfully complete their second dose once they got the appropriate clinical advice and sometimes even a change of vaccine if necessary. I am concerned as she is about the circumstances that she has mentioned. What I would say about the second part of her question is that when it comes to medical exemptions, there will be a medical exemption process in place for anybody who is clinically unable to have the vaccine, but those numbers should be very small in number. I am very grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer. Will that be available by 5 o'clock in the morning on Friday? Absolutely, for those who have been identified by health boards as being unable to complete the vaccine for good clinical reasons—again, those numbers are very small—they will have received notice by the time the scheme comes into place. In fact, I think that letters will be going out to them very shortly, but those numbers are very, very small. They are a very, very small number of people who cannot complete both doses of the vaccine. As I have mentioned in my answer to Megan Gallacher, there are some instances where people have had quite a severe allergic reaction in their first dose, but through the clinical guidance they have been able to receive the second dose successfully. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to raise awareness amongst the public and healthcare professionals of the symptoms of leukemia. The detect cancer early programme works collaboratively with blood cancer charities and aims to raise awareness of possible symptoms, including leukemia symptoms, to ensure that people present to Macy. The NHS recovery plan has committed a further £20 million in the programme. A refresh of the Scottish referral guidelines for suspected cancer was published in January 2019, which supports primary care clinicians to recognise suspicious cancer symptoms, including leukemia, and to put the patient on the right pathway at the right time. Additionally, we continue to support cancer research UK to work with health professionals to raise awareness of symptoms and to promote referral best practice. According to leukemia care, patients with leukemia have a significantly higher rate of emergency diagnosis than other forms of cancer, which means that people only find out that they have leukemia when they present with an emergency. The problem is obviously exacerbated by the pandemic. What does the minister think that the Government can do to increase awareness, given that we know that people are delaying from seeing general practitioners and the backlogs in the health service? One of the challenges with leukemia is the non-specific range of symptoms that it can present with. That makes it difficult to often think that people have a virus rather than having leukemia. You are absolutely right that we need to raise awareness and we need to encourage people when they are feeling unwell and not improving to present at the GP. As you remember, at the beginning of the pandemic, there was a real reluctance from the public to attend healthcare settings. Now, though, we have the level of urgent cancer referrals that are now higher than they were pre-Covid, so I think that we are catching up on that backlog. As you say, the NHS is experiencing significant and sustained pressures, which have been immeasurably exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic, but cancer treatment and diagnosis have been prioritised throughout our response to the Covid pandemic. We have invested an extra 10 million to support cancer services during and beyond the pandemic, focusing on diagnostics and staffing. We also specifically support those who require radiology tests. We have invested 5.6 million to support additional mobile MRI scanners and 3CT scanners, which are operational throughout Scotland, which should speed up access to diagnostic tests in order to speed up a diagnosis. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to support GPs and other healthcare professionals to engage with traditionally hard-to-reach groups. All primary care professionals have a duty of care in relation to reducing health inequalities. To support that, we have established a health inequalities and primary care short-life working group, drawing on a wide range of experts to identify and implement improvements in how primary care better support vulnerable people. Our investment in community links workers is already helping vulnerable people, addressing the issues affecting their health and wellbeing. The GP contract will allow for longer consultations for patients with more complex needs. The long-standing challenge of the unworried unwell, where people impacted by poverty, unemployment and austerity are less engaged with primary healthcare services, will be further exacerbated by the UK Government choice to end universal credit, the biggest overnight cut to social security since World War 2. What reassurance can be given that the Scottish Government is doing everything that it can to ensure that those most vulnerable to health and attention access the healthcare services that they need? I think that the question is incredibly important because what we heard in the debate last night in this chamber was many of the parties, most of the parties in this chamber coming together to condemn what is an unforgivable decision by the UK Government to cut universal credit. It is a perfect storm that they are creating with the end of furlough, a hike in national insurance, rising energy and food prices as well. The Scottish Government estimates that the cut will push 60,000 people in Scotland into poverty, including 20,000 children. We are acutely aware of the need of those impacted by poverty, unemployment and austerity to be fully supported by primary healthcare services. That is why the Scottish Government provides funding to support 150 welfare advice and health partnerships. That is in addition to the investment that I already spoke about in relation to community links workers. More broadly, a working group was established in October last year to identify service improvements in action specifically for primary care to help to reduce health inequalities. It is, of course, not too late for the UK Government to change their minds to reverse the cut. The biggest cut, as Audrey Nicholl rightly says, since the welfare system began, and I hope that they see sense and do so. Warring new figures show that 17 per cent of adults in Scotland are current smokers, and more than that is vape. That contributes to 16 per cent of all Scottish deaths. Those are a hard-to-reach group. We currently have pharmacists offering replacement therapy and counselling, as well as third sector organisations. However, what new measures or interventions will the Government look into to help in the fight to get people to stop smoking? I am pleased that we have a very good record in relation to smoking cessation. Of course, we have taken important and bold measures in this Parliament, under this Government, in order to help with smoking cessation. I would say to Sanders Galhany that he is right. We know that when it comes to one of the biggest preventable causes of illness and death, then smoking is, of course, high up there. I am happy to give more detail and right to Sanders Galhany about the extensive measures that we are taking. In turn, I hope that we can count on his support when it comes to asking his Government or his party in the UK to reverse what will be an unforgivable and damaging cut to universal credit. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on any plans to reintroduce a full GP out of our service in Inverclyde. As the member is aware, in February 2020, the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde health board made the necessary decision to implement business continuity measures for the out of our service to ensure a safe and sustainable service for both patients and staff. Since May of this year, the board reinstated a part-time Saturday service in Inverclyde with the support of local GPs and ANPs. An update paper on the whole service going forward is due to be submitted by the board later this year. That will be subject to consideration by my officials upon receipt in terms of supporting the service moving forward, including, of course, the future of the service from Inverclyde. Welcome to the introduction of the Saturday GP out of our service at the IRH. Until this is extended to other days of the week, many of my constituents will continue to be sent to the IRH in Paisley and to Vaila Leven for the service. In some cases, I have heard that constituents have been sent to the Vaila Leven out of our service just to be sent back to the IRH. Does the Cabinet Secretary therefore agree that plans to reintroduce a fully operational GP out of our service in Inverclyde must be accelerated and that that will have the added benefit of helping to support the NHS recovery ahead of winter? Yes, I agree. Of course, nobody is sitting idly by and I would like to give Stuart McMillan that absolute assurance that when I speak to NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, they are working at pace. Although I said that we expect receipt of that paper later this year, I will go back to the NHS health board to see if that can be sped up. He will understand of course the enormous pressure we are under, but he is also right to see an out of our service will help with some of that pressure as well. I am happy to see if that can be accelerated in any way, shape or form. The cabinet secretary said recently that the Government was on track to meet its target of 800 additional GPs by 2027. Given that a third of GPs say that they are considering early retirement, can the minister say what number of GPs the Government expects to leave the service between now and 2027 and what number of new practitioners does he plan to recruit into GP practice over the same period and will the 800 additional GPs be full-time equivalent posts? What I would say to the members is that we are not simply just looking at forecasts of how many GPs might leave the profession and not doing anything about it. What we are keen to do is work with the likes of the BMA, work with the UK Government when it comes to issues such as pension disincentives to see what we can do to prevent losing those GPs. I had a good discussion with the BMA with the Royal College of GPs in the Scottish Academy recently on what measures we could helpfully bring forward as a Scottish Government in relation to retention. What I would say in fairness to the UK Government when I brought this issue up with Sadiad Javid, the Secretary of State for Health, said that he would go away and take a look at this again. We will invest in those additional 800 GPs, but we will also work on making sure that we retain the current workforce as best we possibly can. 7. Rachael Hamilton To ask the Scottish Government what actions it is taking to recruit GPs in the borders. Cabinet Secretary The number of GPs in the borders has increased since 2015 and is above average per population levels. For Scotland, since the GP contract was introduced in 2018, we have invested £7.3 million in developing MDT multidisciplinary teams and borders to make being a GP there and across Scotland more attractive and more sustainable. We are also implementing Sir Lewis Ritchie's report on rural general practice, which sets out wide-ranging recommendations to bolster the stability of rural general practice and will be vital in achieving a commitment to increase our GP workforce by 800 by 2027. 8. Rachael Hamilton I thank the health secretary for that answer. Caldingham GP practice in my constituency recently closed because of a lack of rural GPs. Health secretary, your Government is failing people living in rural areas because of a lack of workplace planning and an inability to recruit GPs to local areas. Can the cabinet secretary tell me of the target to recruit 800 GPs by 2027? How many of the 230 GPs currently recruited are taken up by rural posts? I will get the information to Rachael Hamilton in terms of the distribution of those additional GPs that have been recruited, as I say, and have said to her in previous occasions that we are on track to meet that 800 target. I am aware of the issues around Caldingham surgery, and I know that the NHS boarders' chief executive has made some remarks, hopefully giving some reassurance to the many patients that have been affected about the alternative arrangements in place in relation to services that are being provided by iMouth surgery. That is, of course, a matter for the local NHS board, but we are implementing, as I said in my first answer, the recommendations of Sir Lewis Ritchie's report and review into rural general practice. In terms of the specific detail that Ms Hamilton asked for, I am happy to provide that in writing. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with NHS Tayside regarding the grading of district nurse roles. I am very aware of the dispute in NHS Tayside around district nurse banding. Like all such disputes, that needs to be resolved through the very well-established nationally agreed procedures. Those procedures have been agreed in partnership with NHS trade unions. It is important that they are followed in all cases to ensure a fair and consistent approach that all parties can have faith in. Scottish Government officials have been in touch with NHS Tayside with a view to ensuring that that is being taken forward in accordance with those procedures and in a way that a robust banding outcome can be arrived at for this particular staffing group. The cabinet secretary will be aware of the hugely valuable role of district nurses, absolutely crucial in provision of community-based care. As such, the district nurses campaign in Dundee has now secured the support of almost 5,000 signatures. I wonder if he can take this opportunity once again to press NHS Tayside to get on with the progress in terms of the job evaluation in order that our district nurses in Tayside can get the recognition that the public give them and that they absolutely deserve. I will press NHS Tayside on that. I know that he is very aware of that. It is hugely important that those nationally agreed procedures are followed, but there should be some pace around that. I absolutely agree with that. I responded, as he knows, because he was copied in to the original correspondence to Ms Jacqueline Finnegan, who had written to me initially to pursue the matter on behalf of district nurses. I know that there is a lot of support in the nursing community and outwith, but I thank him and Shona Robison for both writing to me to raise this issue and for Mr FitzPatrick for raising it again in this chamber. I have here the process that was meant to be followed in June 2018 and April 2019, and then on 1 September, just at the start of this month, district nurses were told in a phone conversation that this award would be made. Yesterday they were told that it was now being moved to an individual process rather than a group negotiation. I agree with Mr FitzPatrick that this has to be delivered. The process is not being followed properly. Will the minister meet me and Mr FitzPatrick to get this resolved and insist that the process is followed properly and that the award is made now? I will not disagree with his characterisation that there was a flaw in the process initially. In 2018, that was uncovered after a freedom of information request either earlier this year or last year. He is absolutely right to say that there was a flaw in the process and NHS Tayside have acknowledged that. I am always happy to meet members, of course, but I would give him an assurance and absolute comfort that, in my discussions with NHS Tayside, they are progressing this matter. Mr FitzPatrick is right that it should be progressed with pace because we know that it is causing some consternation, understandably so, to the district nurses involved. That concludes portfolio questions on health and social care. Before moving on to portfolio questions on social justice, housing and local government, I will allow a short pause to facilitate Government ministers moving to the front bench. The next portfolio question is, as I said, social justice, housing and local government. I remind members that questions 5, 7 and 8 are grouped together and that I will take any supplementaries on those questions after all questions 5, 7 and 8 have been answered. If a member wishes to request a supplementary question, they should press the request-to-speak button or indicate so in the chat function by entering the letter R during the relevant question. I would ask all members to please come forward with short succinct questions and, hopefully, that will be matched by short and succinct answers. I call Beatrice Wishart at question 1. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to mitigate housing shortages and rising housing costs. This Government has delivered over 103,000 affordable homes since 2007 and is committed to delivering 110,000 more affordable homes by 2032, of which 70 per cent will be available for social rent and 10 per cent will be in our remote rural and island communities. In certain areas, short-term lets can make it harder for people to find housing, which is why regulation of short-term lets is vital in balancing the needs and concerns of residents and communities alongside wider economic and tourism industries. We are aware of the concerns around price increases and supply shortages of construction materials and are working through the construction leadership forum to fully understand the current supply chain issues and where possible to put in place mitigating actions. Shetland is facing the perfect storm of building material increases and shortages along with being at the end of the supply chain and a heated housing market along with the lack of affordable homes and social housing. I know that that is mirrored across different parts of Scotland and it impacts particularly on young people and keeping them within rural and island areas. Is the Scottish Government's house building programme ambitious enough to meet the demands of Scotland's current and future housing needs? I think that it is ambitious enough, which is why we have increased our target to 110 more affordable homes. As I said in my initial answer, 10 per cent will be in our remote rural and island communities. Beatrice Wishart might also be aware that we have committed to developing a housing plan specifically for rural and island communities. I want to make sure that all communities have the opportunity to be part of the consultation on that, because we understand that, for local communities, sometimes bespoke solutions are required and we want to support some of those community-led solutions to housing. She might also be aware that I met recently with the chief executive and the leader of Shetland Council, and we had some very productive discussions, particularly how we could work together to address the affordable housing needs of the Shetland area. Recent years, the investment by the Scottish Government in affordable housing in the western isles has been substantial. What can the Scottish Government do to encourage local delivery partners to make sure that rural areas of all local authority areas are not left behind in building projects in the future? While it is for local councils to gather with delivery partners and communities to determine the priorities for affordable housing delivery locally, the Scottish Government's ambitions for affordable housing are clear that we expect to see appropriate delivery in remote rural and island communities. As I said earlier, we are developing a new plan specifically for that. The Scottish Government provides funding through the mainstream affordable housing programme and a rural and islands housing fund. A detailed housing rural needs assessment has recently been completed by the Hebrideen housing partnership, which we would expect to inform the forthcoming local authority strategic housing investment plan. Affordable housing developments are currently on site in Harris, north and south Uist, Barra and Lewis. The Scottish Government will continue to work closely with the local authority to enable future opportunities across the island. Since 2013, more than £6.19 million has been received by Edinburgh City Council alone from developers as an exceptional reason for not building affordable homes as part of those developments. Can the cabinet secretary outline what are those exceptional circumstances and has she spoken to all councils to find out whether or not that money is being used for affordable housing? I am speaking to all councils in due course, and I had a very good discussion with Kate Campbell, the housing convener in Edinburgh, about the particular needs. If the member would like me to finish interrupting from a secondary position, I had a very good discussion with Kate Campbell as a housing convener about the particular local needs for Edinburgh. I recognise that some of the national policies that we have are sometimes quite challenging when there are local housing markets like the situation that we have in Edinburgh. All of those things will remain under consideration. It is not helped, however, by the financial transactions budget cut by the UK Government, a 66.5 per cent cut to the total Scottish Government financial transactions budget in 2021-22 arising from the UK Government spending review. That curtail the sort of initiatives that we would like to continue to see, and perhaps Miles Briggs might want to speak to his UK Government counterparts in order to make sure that that situation is reversed. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Could the cabinet secretary provide an update on any discussions that the Scottish Government has had with local authorities on exploring buying existing homes, particularly those that were sold off under right to buy? I say to Emma Roddick that, of course, the party over on those benches were responsible for the right to buy, which we are now trying to pick up the pieces from in terms of our housing policy. Part of that are a number of initiatives that local authorities can take forward, including the purchase of X right to buy properties, which, of course, we would encourage. For some years, we have been supporting local authorities to purchase existing properties, where that can clearly be seen to support the achievement of the priorities and objectives that are set out in their local housing strategy, and we will continue to do so. To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with local government regarding additional support that it can provide in order to maintain local authority services in areas that are required to host or are affected by planned major events. Scottish Government officials engage regularly with local authorities concerning major events, including through the events industry advisory group and as part of the gateway review process for flagship events. The Minister for Culture, Europe and International Development also has regular meetings with the chair of the events industry advisory group, and ministers have engaged across sectors and partners throughout the pandemic, including with local government. It is not just cities such as Glasgow that will be affected by major events such as COP26. Neighboring communities such as North Ayrshire and McLeod have all expressed concerns about the potential impact of an event such as this, including the influx of tourists and visitors, traffic, disruption to travel and, of course, the lack of suitable public amenities. Can I ask what additional support the Scottish Government will be giving to councils to help them to manage the impact of events such as COP, given that service is already under huge amounts of pressure and against the context of budget cuts to local government? First, I thank Jamie Greene for raising the issue on behalf of the local authorities that he represents in his region. I am sure that he will appreciate that, with an event led by the UK Government and with a joint responsibility for all levels of local authorities—the Scottish Government and the UK Government—to be working together towards a successful COP to ensure that we have regular engagement, which is led by Mr Matheson. If there are specific pressures that Jamie Greene on behalf of the region that he represents, we would like to raise with ministers, and we would welcome correspondence on that. I am sure that he will appreciate that it covers a variety of ministerial portfolios, but if he wants to direct that through me, I will be happy to receive it. Council workers have been heroic over the course of the pandemic and will be, again, during the course of the large events that Mr Greene outlined. Given that they are key workers, just like NHS staff, will the minister lobby the cabinet secretary for finance in the same way that the cabinet secretary invited Miles Briggs to intervene with his UK Government colleagues to fund the pay deal for local government staff that they deserve on a par with NHS staff to avert the potential strike action and the disruption that that would cause in our schools? I appreciate the importance of the issues that Mr Griffin has raised. I hope that he appreciates that those issues are under consideration by ministers, particularly the cabinet secretary for finance, and there is an on-going process here. I note the points that he has made, but I am sure that he will appreciate that that is an on-going area of consideration for ministers, particularly the cabinet secretary for finance. I am grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government whether the recent funding announcement of £50 million for homeless services will be new money or funds previously allocated to existing budgets. In the programme for government 2021-22, we announced an additional £50 million to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping, taking forward our ending homelessness together action plan, including specific work to scale up housing first more rapidly, end the use of communal night shelters, advance legislative protections for people experiencing domestic abuse, and explore alternative ways to reduce migrant homelessness. The £50 million of new resource will be invested over this parliamentary term, and is in addition to the £50 million multi-year fund that was announced in 2017. Homelessness crisis was moving people off the streets in response to a pandemic, but we just moved them on. As we go forward, what are the Government's specific intentions with regard to putting the homeless at the centre of the solutions to homelessness in Scotland? Can I thank Martin Whitfield for his question? We want to take forward what has been described as world-leading legislation policy around homelessness further. There is always more to do, so we are looking at the prevention duty, which the member will be aware of, which I think could help us to enhance what is already a very robust set of homelessness legislation. I will be looking—in fact, I just met officials this morning—to talk about the timeframe and the details of how we will take that forward. I am happy to keep the member appraised of the detail of that moving forward. Can I ask the cabinet secretary what support is in place to support people who are homeless and have mental health issues and who may be unable to live in communal spaces? The housing first programme ensures that people with multiple and complex needs are allocated settled accommodation with the individually tailored support that they need in mainstream tenancies in the community rather than in larger-scale communal settings. We promote a wrong-door approach to improve joint working between health homelessness and front-line services in recognition of the challenges that people with multiple and complex needs have in accessing housing and are seeking views on practical options for improving access to mental health support and services for people experiencing homelessness. The member may be interested in the analysis that was put out by crisis just today, which shows that the proportion of people suffering from the worst forms of homelessness in Scotland is about half as high as England, which campaigners have said, but is due to the policies of the Scottish Government. There is always more to do, and we are determined to do it. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Further to the answer to Martin Whitefield, if £50 million additional money has been announced in the programme for government, how much has still not been allocated under the old £50 million that was announced in 2017? I can write to the member with the specific details of that, but you will see from the extent of the work on homelessness that is going on that there is a lot of effort, a lot of resource going in, not least through the pandemic. I can update the committee on whether every penny of that £50 million has been allocated, but surely it is a good news story that there is a further £50 million allocated to tackle homelessness, and, hopefully, Miles Briggs would be able to welcome the comments from crisis. This is crisis saying this, that the proportion of people suffering the worst forms of homelessness in Scotland is half that of England because of the policies of this Government. Surely even Miles Briggs can recognise what the Scottish Government actually gets things right and has policies that actually are being praised by leading homelessness charities like crisis. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the discussions that it has had with the UK Government regarding the £20 reduction to universal credit. The Scottish Government has written to the UK Government on eight separate occasions since March 2020 to ask them to retain the much-needed £20 uplift. On 30 August, I joined colleagues from Wales and Northern Ireland to write to the UK Government urging them to retain the uplift. We have not so far received a response. Of course, there is broad cross-party opposition to the cut and only yesterday parties across the chamber with the exception of the Conservatives voted overwhelmingly in favour of the UK Government reversing their cut. It is time for the UK Government to do the right thing and listen. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. There are around 8,000 families and individuals across my constituency on universal credit who are already struggling before the pandemic. With the end of the furlough scheme looming coupled with price increases across our retail sector as well as massive energy hikes, cutting the £20 uplift in universal credit without carrying out an impact assessment is a complete dereliction of duty. Will the cabinet secretary continue to push the UK Government on this matter and seek a reversal of this punitive decision? Absolutely. We will continue to call on the UK Government to provide support to the poorest in society not to take it away. As the member points out, people in Scotland are facing a perfect storm of hardship this winter, as food and energy prices soar. Support from the UK Government in the form of the universal credit uplift, self-employment scheme and the furlough scheme are being withdrawn all at the same time. The height in this Parliament showed yesterday that there is broad cross-party unity for reversing this cut to avoid the immense hardship that it will cause and the UK Government should listen to those cross-party calls. Question 7, from Willie Coffey, who is joining us remotely. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the impact that the £20 reduction to universal credit could have on households in Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley. The Scottish Government analysis indicates that as many as 6,614 households in Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley could lose out as a result of the UK Government's decision to cut universal credit from the start of October. Their cut could remove over £460 million in social security spending from Scotland by 2023-24. The Scottish Government is doing all that we can, but that level of mitigation is not sustainable. The UK Government must reverse this cut immediately to avoid a weakened universal credit compounding the harms caused by the perfect storm of rising energy, food increases and national insurance increases. Thank you, cabinet secretary, for that answer. The impact of this cut on my constituents will be far reaching with over 6,000 people directly affected, as the cabinet secretary said. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that plunging so many more people into poverty is hardly the way to encourage people back into work and is an attack by the Tories on the poorest people in our society? I agree with that. As we know that many people who are on universal credit are already in work and as we set out a number of people across the chamber set out yesterday that this will do nothing to help or motivate people to get into work. If the UK Government had any confidence in its workforce plans and its plans to support people into work, it would not be going ahead with the cut. Again, I implore it to have a change of mind. Can I remind members that Questions 5, 7 and 8 are grouped together and that any member seeking to ask a supplementary should press their request-to-speak button or mark art in the chat room during the course of question 8? To ask the Scottish Government what measures it has taken to address the consequences of the deduction of universal credit and any potential impact on child poverty. It can't always be for this Government, with its limited powers and budget, to mitigate all the impacts of another Government's actions. As was set out yesterday, the extent of the consequences for people who are already struggling was laid out very clearly indeed. As I set out in the debate yesterday, this Government, this Parliament and many others are urging the UK Government to do the right thing and reverse this cut. The impact of this cut on six million households across the UK will be harsh and are likely to negate the good, positive and progressive actions that this Government is taking to tackle child poverty head on, including through the Scottish child payment, the bridging payments, which are benefiting thousands of children and young people, and we will put over £130 million into the pockets of families this year. As you stated, all parliamentary parties accept the Tories are in agreement that this cut is shameful and must be reversed, but we must also recognise that here in Scotland we can mitigate the worst of the effects and in turn help to tackle child poverty in particular. As such, will the cabinet secretary immediately use the powers that we have in Scotland to double the Scottish child payment and then commit to investigating and doubling it again to meet the desperate need that we have in my own constituency of south of Scotland but across Scotland before we see incidences of child poverty reaching desperate levels? I can say to the member that it would just not be sustainable on a fixed budget for this Parliament to mitigate every single action that the UK Government takes. It just isn't sustainable, we would have to cut into huge swathes of the health budget or the budgets to local government, we just can't do that, so what we have to do is to target our efforts on where we can make the biggest impact and there's no doubt over this Government's intention to double the Scottish child payment. We've said that we're going to do that as part of the budget process, which is fast approaching. Also, as I've said in this chamber, we will look at what else we can do to support the families most affected and we are currently looking at what else can be done in terms of supporting families through this very, very difficult winter, but the member and her party who call time and time again for mitigation of policies made in a different place and yet they don't support this Parliament having the powers to have the policies set here, which would avoid us having to mitigate in the first place, so please join us in making sure that we get the powers here in this Parliament. The Children's Commissioner for Scotland has noted that the UK Government's plans to cut universal credit could effectively knock out the benefit that the Scottish child payment brings into families. Does the cabinet secretary agree that this demonstrates why we need full social security powers in Scotland if we are going to successfully tackle poverty without our efforts undermined by Westminster? I agree, as I said in my last answer, that prevention is better than cure, is it not? If we had the powers here, we would not have to mitigate policies that undermine efforts to tackle poverty that are made elsewhere. However, the Scottish Government is taking and has taken ambitious steps to tackle child poverty, promote social justice and level the playing field for young people from low-income backgrounds. That is why, in 2021, out of our fixed budget, we have invested £2.5 billion to support low-income households, including nearly £1 billion to directly support children. Those are decisions made by this Government in order to try and support those families in the best way that we can. However, that is seriously undermined if there are policies elsewhere that go in the opposite direction. That concludes portfolio questions. Before moving on to the next item of business, there will be a short pause to allow front-bench Government and Opposition speakers to take their places.